Palmer Blevins Blog

This article is featured on Helium.com

There is absurd war on religious freedom being waged in the US by those who relish the idea of turning schools in Illinois into quaint little Christian madrasas. Illinois is at the center of this controversy due to our wonderful Silent Reflection and Student Prayer Act, which was vetoed by then IL Gov. Rod Blagojevich, overridden by the IL General Assembly, struck down in federal court and then subsequently suspended in May of 2008; and the modern day Pharisees otherwise known as the Christian right are up in arms.

In a recently sponsored bill by Representative John Fritchey (D-Chicago), the law would be changed to make it voluntary, instead of mandatory, moment for “silent prayer or for silent reflection on the anticipated activities of the day.” Religious zealots are not happy with this proposed change, and fail to see the hypocrisy that lie in their desire to have government mandate obligatory religous practice. These are the very people who feign outrage in regards to supposed government intrusion into their beliefs and daily lives; but when it affects non-fundamentalist Christians…it is more than acceptable. No other religious group, be it Islamic, Jewish, Hindu, etc., is making a fuss over the propposed change; and it is not like the law is forbidding reflective silence or silent prayer.

Our modern day Inquisitors and Puritans should understand that enforcing a mandatory moment of prayer or reflective silence is not going to end the problems plaguing our public schools; it is not going to end bullying, drugs, unruly students from misbehaving…nor will it prevent guns and other weapons from entering our schools. Our modern day witch-hunters seek to sneak religion into a sphere of society that will not benefit from its enforcement; and instead of blaming the ills of society on liberals, secularists, atheists and the producers of Will & Grace, they should spend their energies like the rest of us; on matters that truly are of consequence (like the economy).

If a teacher or student wishes to take a moment to step outside of a classroom to a designated area for a moment of silent reflection or prayer, more power to them. But the legislators and religious zealots pushing for mandatory reflection or prayer need to back off. Just as they would not like their children to be forced to observe a moment steeped in religion, they should not be so callous and disrespectful to force children who are not their own to do the same. As a taxpayer, there is a lot that I would like to see done in Illinois’ public school system; but mandatory religion is not something I am keen on paying for or having my representative to vote on. If a parent wants his/her son or daughter to pray or observe a moment of silence there are numerous parochial schools and there is always home. Let’s keep religion a private matter. America was founded on the principal of religious freedom; where an individual was able to worship, or not worship, free from not only government intervention but also from those who have nothing better to do than be concerned with what others are doing. It is time to end the war on religious freedom being waged by a small sector of society that have their knickers so tightly bound that they can barely fit their heads up their own keisters anymore.

There is a global war on religious freedom being waged: religous fanatics wanting to shove religion down the throats of those who are more concerned about matters of real importance (such as trying to make ends meet, to enjoy at least a moment of happiness, etc.), funamentalists subverting democracy to rob moderates and the un-religious of their God-given right to criticize that which is illogical and often times criminal, and supposed “holy” men and women threatening to kill, and in most cases, threatening to kill anyone who musters the courage to combat them.

There is a war on free speech and free thinking, being carried out by the most savage and most vile of human beings; and it is a war that we should be concerned about losing.  Writer Johann Hari has written a beautiful piece entitled “Stand up for the Right to Criticize Religion,” and I implore everyone to read it.  And suprise, suprise, suprise, religious fanatics have their panties in a twist, and calling for not only the imprisonment of the editor, publisher and writtter…but some of the more “godly” want a worse punishment for daring to speak ill of their religion.  Who ever guesses followers of the “religion of peace” gets a cookie.

Yet, despite the riots and threats, he is continuing the fight.  This man has become a hero to me.

“All people deserve respect, but not all ideas do. I don’t respect the idea that a man was born of a virgin, walked on water, and rose from the dead. I don’t respect the idea that we should follow a ‘Prophet’ who at the age of 53 had sex with a nine-year old girl, and ordered the murder of whole villages of Jews because they wouldn’t follow him. I don’t respect the idea that the West Bank was handed to Jews by God and the Palestinians should be bombed or bullied into surrendering it. I don’t respect the idea that we may have lived before as goats, and could live again as woodlice. This is not because of “prejudice” or “ignorance”, but because there is no evidence for these claims. They belong to the childhood of our species, and will in time look as preposterous as believing in Zeus or Thor or Baal.

When you demand “respect”, you are demanding we lie to you. I have too much real respect for you as a human being to engage in that charade.

But why are religious sensitivities so much more likely to provoke demands for censorship than, say, political sensitivities? The answer lies in the nature of faith. If my views are challenged I can, in the end, check them against reality. If you deregulate markets, will they collapse? If you increase carbon dioxide emissions, does the climate become destabilised? If my views are wrong, I can correct them; if they are right, I am soothed.

But when the religious are challenged, there is no evidence for them to consult. By definition, if you have faith, you are choosing to believe in the absence of evidence. Nobody has ‘faith’ that fire hurts, or Australia exists; they know it, based on proof. But it is psychologically painful to be confronted with the fact that your core beliefs are based on thin air, or on the empty shells of revelation or contorted parodies of reason. It’s easier to demand the source of the pesky doubt be silenced.”

Amen, brother.  Amen.

This article is featured on Helium.com

How does one convert to Buddhism? Before we dive into the matter, let’s understand that Buddhism is not really a religion, per se; it is a Dharmic philosophy originally professed by Lord Buddha that eventually became divided into various “schools” spanning multiple cultures, ethnic and language groups. Just like any other philosophy, a “student” of one of the various Buddhist sects can still adhere to a particular religious denomination. For example: there are many Christians, Jews, Hindus and atheists who adhere to the various philosophies of individuals like Hobbes, Locke, Marx, Nietzsche, Gandhi, etc., and there is no apparent conflict between their religious beliefs and their philosophical beliefs; in a similar vein, there is no real conflict for a Christian, Jew, Hindu or even atheist to follow the teachings of Lord Buddha. Buddhism, for all intents and purposes, does not have a set dogma or canon; and that is what separates it from the label of religion.

There is no set catechism for “converting” to Buddhism; although those wishing to join a particular Buddhist school (such as Zen or Tibetan) can seek out a group and learn from a spiritual leader or master if the student desires a set structure and discipline. I became a student of Buddhism about five years ago when a friend introduced me to insight meditation and manifestation.

Buddhism, collectively, is a philosophy that focuses on the enlightenment of the individual while maintaining a balance between the individual and the world around him/her in with the ultimate goal of liberation (moksha) from the cycle of re-birth and suffering in mind. Becoming a Buddhist is not as easy as reading a book, liking what one reads, and then saying “I’m a Buddhist.” And it is not as easy as twisting your legs into the full lotus position and chanting “om” a couple times. Rather, becoming a student takes a lot of effort, concentration, meditation, dedication and pure willingness to change one’s life forever. It also takes a little bit of guidance.

There are two fundamental teachings of the Lord Buddha that a student should be knowledgeable of, however; and they are: the Four Noble Truths and the Noble Eightfold Path. The Four Noble Truths teach the student that 1) the world is suffering (dukkha); from the moment we are born to the moment we die, life is suffering, 2) the cause or origin of suffering comes from desire (samudaya), 3) the cessation of suffering (nirodha) comes about by relinquishing our dependence on our desires or cravings, and 4) The Way/the Noble Eight Fold Path (marga) is the way to end suffering.

The Way consists of eight teachings for developing “good” karma and ultimately ending the cycle of rebirth and suffering and they are right view, right intention, right speech, right action, right livelihood, right effort, right mindfulness, and right concentration. The Way can be categorized into three parts or concentrations: 1) wisdom (prajna), which consists of right view (in which one gains knowledge) and right intention (in which one gains liberation), 2) ethical conduct (sila), which consists of right speech, right action and right livelihood, and 3) concentration (samadhi), which consists of right effort, right mindfulness, and right concentration.

By becoming versed in the Four Noble Truths and The Way, the new Buddhist student then can apply those fundamental teachings to their meditative practices and interactions with not only others but nature as well to bring about quality change in their lives and the cessation of the facets that contribute to suffering. These two teachings enable to student to become aware, knowledgeable, connected and a steward for others seeking liberation.

Since 9-11, many individuals have spoken out about the need to clean up the image of a particular religion of “peace” and combat negative stereotypes. Some even created Tv stations. A couple pointers in how to effectively combat negative stereotypes should you really want to do so:

If you profess to follow a religion of peace, do not go around killing people or threatening to kill people or engage in acts of terrorism when they criticize your religion.

And most important of all, if you spent so much time creating a Tv station to combat negative stereotypes about your religion, don’t walk around like a bully, beat your wife and then behead her when she wants a divorce.

This article is featured on Helium.com

The Wheel of Law, or the Wheel of Dharma/Dharmachakra, is a Buddhist concept that uses the wheel of a chariot as a symbol for righteous action that will ultimately lead to the end of the cycle of samsara (rebirth). It is said that Lord Buddha set the Wheel of Dharma into motion with is first sermon at the Deer Park in Sarnath; this is known as the “first turning.” Subsequent turnings of Dharmachakra took place during his sermons at Rajgir and Shravasti, respectively.

The wheel itself represents not only the cycle of rebirth, but also karmic action. The wheel’s motion is a metaphor for not only Lord Buddha’s setting into motion rapid spiritual maturity for an individual seeking enlightenment and freedom, but also the individual’s turning of the cycle of rebirth through karmic action or cause and effect. The more “bad karma” one puts into motion, the more likely history is to repeat for that individual, most likely through rebirth into another samsaric realm, or life-form for easier understanding; the more “good karma” one sets into motion, the less suffering he/she will endure in this world…and the next.

On the Wheel of Dharma, there are eight spokes; symbolizing the Noble Eightfold Path that Lord Buddha taught: right view, right intention, right speech, right action, right livelihood, right effort, right mindfulness, and right concentration. The Wheel of Dharma is also divided into three parts or “three trainings” of Buddhist philosophy: the hub symbolizes moral discipline or ethical conduct, the spokes are representative of wisdom while the rim symbolizes concentration or meditation. Action sets the wheel into motion; however, the wheel turns as one unit with all three parts working in co-operation.

By leading a righteous life, one set’s into motion good karma and possible re-birth in a higher realm; however, the goal of moksha (liberation or release) being the paramount goal. Moksha is the ending of the cycle of rebirth and suffering. However, wrong or incomplete actions can set the wheel turning negatively; thus creating “bad” karma, which leads to not only more suffering and pain for the individual (and ultimately all of creation since everyone and everything is interconnected), but also re-birth into a lower samsaric realm…which leads to more suffering. By following Lord Buddha’s teachings, the Wheel of Dharma can be stopped with the reward of ultimate liberation.

As a symbol, the wheel is used to defeat ignorance, suffering and other negative or otherwise incomplete or “evil” actions, thoughts, desires, etc. However, in order to set the wheel into motion, produce “good” karmic action, and ultimately stop the wheel’s cycle; one must completely follow the Lord Buddha’s teachings.

This article is featured on Helium.com

OMG! Three little letters that get the the tightest of whiteys tied up in knots. OMG! This phrase’s use in popular lexicon, can be used as an exclamation for a number of a number of emotions: such as excitement, happiness, relief, sorrow, guilt, anger, etc. Of course, those who are prone to more sacrilegious exclamations sometimes add the letter “F” to create “OMFG,” which in modern parlance means “O My F’ing God.”

I was raised a Southern Baptist, and many a time I got my mouth washed with soap for daring to take His name in “vain.” In the past couple years, I’ve taken notice of the many prudes who are more than willing to shove God down the throats of others; but can’t stomach the use of God’s name in phrases such as OMG! I am one to think that the Supreme Deity is more preoccupied with other things, such as ensuring that the world keeps spinning, the rivers keep flowing, and that humanity doesn’t wipe itself (along with everything else) out, etc.; than some snot nosed teenage punk uttering or writing the phrase OMG.

Is the use of OMG taking the “Lord’s Name” in vain, or insulting to the Great I Am? I can see it as being so if the letter F (and the word it is representative of) is added to the phrase; but I fail to see the All Mighty as an entity that is as self-centered, arrogant, vain, egotistical or easily to anger, sensitive and easily offended as the religious fundamentalists, fanatics and zealots make Him/Her out to be. Ok, let’s consider the argument that it is insulting to our Creator. I can see that, but I, just like everyone else, do not know what the Heavenly Father/Mother thinks…let alone what He/She takes as an insult. But if I were a gambling person (which I am only during the Super Bowl, and that after I’ve asked YHWH to ensure my team covers the spread), I would wager to say that God has been less offended by the utterance/writing of the phrase “OMG” than he has been by such crimes as the Crusades, the Inquisition, the Holocaust, the Killing Fields, and the “ministries” of Pat Robertson and Jerry Falwell.

God is probably more insulted by people who profess that they converse with the Almighty and that he directs them to hate, discriminate, etc., in His/Her name. God more than likely can handle OMG! a lot more than he can all the honor killings, lies, hypocrisy and injustice that have been carried out by those who profess to be His/Her followers. God probably can stomach OMFG! a helluva lot more than he can stomach what those “Created In His Image” has done to His wonderful creation.

So how does God feel about the expression OMG!? I really don’t know, but I think God doesn’t really care as He/She has more important issues to deal with; and if God could speak, he would probably tell the prudes and censors of the world to get a life and maybe stop caring about the actions of others and deal with their own plank filled eyes. Of course, just as the more religious minded like to delude themselves into thinking they know what God would feel about something, that is what I think God would say.

This article is featured on Helium.

Many successful business owners may feel that bequeathing the family business to a child or other heir is sufficient enough in ensuring the business’ continuation; however, it is of vast importance to have a succession plan in place to ensure a smooth transition of ownership and management of the business. In developing the succession plan, it is of great importance for the owner to speak with his/her attorney, accountant and financial adviser; and regularly consult with them on a regular basis to keep the plan timely.

The first major issue to consider in the succession plan is what the owner wants to happen to his/her company in the event that he/she retires, is disabled, dies, or otherwise becomes incapacitated. If the owner decides that he/she wants the company to continue in his/her absence, then the matter of succession must be decided: does the company go to a spouse, children, or other heir; be it familial or an outsider. Should it be the latter, then the owner must decide on a mechanism in which the shares of family members/heirs are bought out.

If the owner decides that he/she wants to give the company’s ownership over to an heir or heirs, a couple other factors come into play. Is ownership given to a spouse or children (or combination) who have shown in interest in the day to day operations of the company or is it equally divided amongst heirs, even the ones who really have no vested interest in the company other than having a share of the ownership and any profits? Family politics in regards to succession of ownership is a tricky minefield that not only can tear a family apart, but the business as well. In fighting can lead to sabotage, the ending of relationships with historical and valuable vendors and clients, the tarnishing of the business’ image, etc. Delicate care must be taken and a number of factors taken into consideration in choosing who will take over the reigns of the company when the owner is gone. Most owners, more than likely, will want to choose someone who is trustworthy, who knows the inner workings of the family business, who can manage the business and various relationships, and who has a vested interest in the company’s survival other than a pay check and/or an inheritance.

A second major issue to consider is the changing tax laws governing inheritance, estates, business, etc. For a succession plan to be implemented successfully and without much turbulence, it is of great importance to keep up-to-date with the laws and tax codes to ensure a smooth transition of ownership; and this means updating the plan on a continual basis and ensuring all interested parties are kept aware of any and all facts of importance.

A third major issue to consider is the possibility (and right) of a bank or other financial institution “calling the note” in the event of an owner’s death, disability or retirement, which can lead to much unneeded stress and turmoil. Further, if the owner wishes for his/her business to continue in his/her absence, it is also important to re-ensure vendors, clients and financial institutions of the company’s intent to continue and that there will be a smooth transition of ownership when the owner becomes incapacitated; and that the new owner has the experience and expertise to handle the day to day operations of being the new owner.

In conclusion, succession planning is of vital importance for individuals who have worked hard at building a business from the ground up and wish for their company to continue in their absence. This means ensuring that the all interested parties are aware of the owner’s intentions and desires, keeping up-to-date on current laws, accounts, relationships, etc., and continually updating the succession plan in order to stay on top of any changes or unusual circumstances that could have an effect on the smooth transition of ownership once the original owner is no longer with the company.

This article is featured on Helium.com

The issue of whether or not General Robert E. Lee of Virginia should have been tried for treason against the United States of America is tricky. Article 3, Section 3 of the US Constitution clearly defines what treason is: “Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort.”

According to the US Constitution, General Robert E. Lee, despite his allegiance to Virginia first and foremost, was an American citizen and not only gave aid and comfort to the Confederacy but also helped the Confederacy wage war against the United States. However, two things to consider. The first being that within the same portion of the Constitution, it also states that “no Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the testimony of two Witnesses to the save overt Act, or on Confession in open court.” Granted, there probably would have been a number of people who would have been more than happy to appear in court and give eye-witness accounts proving that Lee in fact waged war against the US and also gave comfort to its enemies; but then again, in those times there was a code of honor between generals and armies, and it is probably unlikely that an individual such as General Grant would have bore witness against Lee as a traitor.

Second, there is the whole state’s rights debate; and whether or not states could secede from the Union. There is no article within the US Constitution that declares whether a state could or could not secede from the Union; therefore, it could be argued that the union of states is not permanent and that the Confederacy was well within its rights to secede since there was no Constitutional law prohibiting secession. Therefore, though General Lee was an enemy combatant against the United States, he was not necessarily fighting against his country (the US) as much as he was fighting for his country (the Confederacy); and this could explain why no Confederate leader was ever tried for treason. It could further be argued that General Lee and the Confederacy were holding to the ideals set forth in the Declaration of Independence: “…it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government…”

With a literal interpretation of the Constitution, I feel that Robert E. Lee and other Confederate leaders should have been tried for treason; but since the issue of secession was, and still is, Constitutionally ambiguous, I don’t think any prosecution would have succeeded in trying them for treason and would only have further infuriated those angry with the outcome of the Civil War.

This article is featured on Helium.com

The minimal expectation of any good government is providing it’s citizenry with adequate security prior to, during and after an external or internal threat; be it natural or by man. It is a government’s responsibility (whether it is a tribal, municipal, state, national or international institution) to be good stewards of its peoples (regardless of age, sex, religion, creed or ethnicity) and ensure that they are well protected from natural disasters, attack or other types of threat. A government can be said to be providing its people with adequate security when they are relatively safe from attack, natural or man-made disasters, economic collapse, etc.

In the last eight years, it could be said, the US government has failed in its minimal expectation of providing adequate security to the people: whether it be the Bush Administration’s refusal to take heed in regards to threats posed by Osama bin Laden, clear up to September 10, 2001; the government’s lack of preparation for Hurricane Katrina and its slow response afterward; or even the war in Iraq while turning away from the war in Afghanistan…which has made America and her people less safe. It could be considered a stretch, but I think the government’s slow and inept response to the economic breakdown prior to the 2008 Presidential Election could be considered a breach of the government’s responsibility to the people by making their lives less secure.

By doing nothing to prepare for a future economic meltdown, precipitated by the housing/mortgage crisis, and doing nothing until the last minute, the government failed in its responsibility to provide security to a good majority of its people. For the first time since the Great Depression, there is rampant unemployment, outrageous amounts of debt (both personal, corporate and national), people are losing their homes because of greed not only exhibited by Wall Street but also the individual, the American people are being divided all the more by ideologically driven individuals who are more of a problem than voices of a solution, and there is an un-American sense of not only dread, but of piping anger.

Though it is not the responsibility of a government to give a handout to individuals who are more than capable, it is a good government’s responsibility to put the will of the people over the hedonistic nepotism, cronyism, despotism and gilded greed that roams the halls of government and the financial institutions on Wall Street like a thief in the night. Because of the former Bush Administration’s callous disdain for truth, responsibility and transparency; the American people have just begun to feel the insecurity and hopelessness that many of our grandparents recalled about the Great Depression. And it is a shame that partisan zealots, who would rather see a President fail because they lost an election, are doing everything in their power to stand in the way of not only recovery, but also reform; the very individuals who stood idly by while the government shirked its responsibility of providing national, economic and labor security to the American people for the last eight years are now the ones putting up as many roadblocks as possible. It is not just hypocrisy, but a shame.

If America is to once again become like a city upon a hill, our government has got to take up the banner of providing security for everyone within its borders; and it starts by providing adequate economic and job security; all the while also ensuring adequate preparation and response to natural/man-made disasters as well as threats and actual attacks on the citizenry.

A big thanks to Marie, who gave me a link to one Elinor Blevins, auto fiend. As soon as I get a spare moment, I will be putting the link up on the Blevins Ancestry Website.